AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2011-09-23, 16:39   Link #16761
GDB
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solace View Post
How do you define speed?
Generally in terms of velocity.

Quote:
We measure it in the distance something takes to get from one spot to another spot, right? In that context, we can measure how long it takes light to travel from a source until it arrives.

But dark is different. Dark exists where light does not, and light is limited in source and duration, while dark is not. In the absence of light, can you describe how quickly darkness travels? Does it travel? Can it travel?
So like I said, it either exists or it does not (or, in place of "does not", is masked by light). It doesn't travel, ergo has no speed.

Quote:
Think about it like this: To an observer, if I left and arrived at the same time, did I go somewhere very quickly, or nowhere instantly?
Well, in terms of definitions, to leave you must go somewhere else, and to arrive you must come from somewhere else. So you can either move instantaneously, or you need better wording.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RRW View Post
should we make thread about this faster than light news.

seem important and discuss worthy
I'd say not until it's actually confirmed in any sense. Hearsay from random journalists is rather meh.
GDB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 16:42   Link #16762
RRW
Unspecified
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Unspecified
but CERN themselves said they did it

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/...d_8695154.html
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011...d.html?_r=2&hp

Edit: screw it, i decide make my own thread my self

http://forums.animesuki.com/showthre...50#post3777650
__________________

Last edited by RRW; 2011-09-23 at 16:58.
RRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 16:58   Link #16763
GDB
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 28
And they said they want others to independently verify their results. If it's not verified, then it isn't confirmed. That's how science works.
GDB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 17:00   Link #16764
Dextro
He Without a Title
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Age: 27
Send a message via Skype™ to Dextro
Ars Technica has a pretty good article on the whole "faster than light neutrinos" thing.

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/...time-space.ars

Bottom line: it's pretty exciting stuff and the detail of the measurements they have made is breath taking (they managed to measure continental drift!) but, and this is a big but, they are only human and as such it is possible that they have forgotten some variable that accounts for the 60ns or so difference.

So I'm pretty excited about this but let's see how it pans out before asking for warp drives.
__________________

Dextro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 17:02   Link #16765
RRW
Unspecified
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Unspecified
of course you need to run the test again to see if this right. then again this will very BIG thing if this happens

anyway just continue to discuss on other thread so we dont waste another page for this
__________________
RRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 18:00   Link #16766
DonQuigleone
Knight Errant
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 25
This whole "speed of darkness" debate is pointless. Darkness does not physically exist, rendering the entire point moot. It's like asking what the speed of cold is. Both are the absence of something else, they do not "travel".
DonQuigleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 18:03   Link #16767
Ithekro
Warning
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 36
There seem to be two schools of thought as to what could be done with this knowledge (if ever a practical use can be found): Time Travel, and High Speed Propulsion (FTL Drives).

Time Travel would seem to have serious problems associated with it in terms of paradoxes and the like (unless time travel actualy works like it does in Haruhi...blame the God Empress I suppose). FTL Drives allow for rapid movement of objects, not only around our own solar system, but to other solar systems. Of course the question is...just how much faster than light is their particle? 60 nanoseconds over how much distance verse say the distance verse a light year in a year's time?
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai! Signature by ganbaru
Rena's Saimoe Take Home List 2014: Dairenji Suzuka.Misawa Maho.
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 18:13   Link #16768
ChainLegacy
廉頗
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Massachusetts, US
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
This whole "speed of darkness" debate is pointless. Darkness does not physically exist, rendering the entire point moot. It's like asking what the speed of cold is. Both are the absence of something else, they do not "travel".
I'm probably a little more ignorant than physics than others here. But is it not true to say that a part of existence that is total darkness, is some other dimension that has not yet been encapsulated by our expanding universe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
There seem to be two schools of thought as to what could be done with this knowledge (if ever a practical use can be found): Time Travel, and High Speed Propulsion (FTL Drives).

Time Travel would seem to have serious problems associated with it in terms of paradoxes and the like (unless time travel actualy works like it does in Haruhi...blame the God Empress I suppose). FTL Drives allow for rapid movement of objects, not only around our own solar system, but to other solar systems. Of course the question is...just how much faster than light is their particle? 60 nanoseconds over how much distance verse say the distance verse a light year in a year's time?
Right... simply being faster than light doesn't mean much when it takes light itself millions of years to reach your wanted destination.

Someone answer me this question. If I were to instantly jump from my present location to any given star in the universe, would I not be traveling into the past on some level?
ChainLegacy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 18:19   Link #16769
DonQuigleone
Knight Errant
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChainLegacy View Post
I'm probably a little more ignorant than physics than others here. But is it not true to say that a part of existence that is total darkness, is some other dimension that has not yet been encapsulated by our expanding universe?
No.


You're probably thinking of Dark Energy, or Dark Matter. That's simply stuff we can't see, not "darkness".
DonQuigleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 18:46   Link #16770
Solace
(ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
Well, in terms of definitions, to leave you must go somewhere else, and to arrive you must come from somewhere else. So you can either move instantaneously, or you need better wording.
You're not thinking with portals! The wording was precise. Wherever you go, there you are!

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
This whole "speed of darkness" debate is pointless. Darkness does not physically exist, rendering the entire point moot. It's like asking what the speed of cold is. Both are the absence of something else, they do not "travel".
That's just nonsense. Everyone knows that if cold could move the phologistons inside of it would combust and melt.
__________________
Solace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 18:53   Link #16771
ChainLegacy
廉頗
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Massachusetts, US
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
No.


You're probably thinking of Dark Energy, or Dark Matter. That's simply stuff we can't see, not "darkness".
As far as I know, dark energy and dark matter are part of our universe. Their role isn't well understood but hasn't it recently come to light (lulz) that the dark matter actually accounts for much of the universe's mass?

What I meant to say, worded somewhat clumsily; is there a part of the universe in which there is no light whatsoever (total darkness)? Hasn't light infiltrated every reach of the universe, and some lightless portion would therefore be outside of it?
ChainLegacy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 19:56   Link #16772
DonQuigleone
Knight Errant
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChainLegacy View Post
As far as I know, dark energy and dark matter are part of our universe. Their role isn't well understood but hasn't it recently come to light (lulz) that the dark matter actually accounts for much of the universe's mass?

What I meant to say, worded somewhat clumsily; is there a part of the universe in which there is no light whatsoever (total darkness)? Hasn't light infiltrated every reach of the universe, and some lightless portion would therefore be outside of it?
That's a completely different matter. "Dark Matter" (which does indeed make up most of the universe) is not "Darkness". The name is simply referring to the fact that we can not see it, it is not emitting light -> Dark matter. Dark matter is not existing in some lightless portion of the universe, it exists pretty much everywhere, we simply can't see it, because it's "dark". It emits nothing, and no other light reflects off it.

But as I said, Dark matter is not "Darkness". Darkness doesn't exist. It's just like a Hole can't be said to exist. They are both just a lack of something.

If you had a hole in the ground, and the wall collapsed, filling it up, but leaving another hole next to it, would you say the hole has moved? No, the earth moved, and a new hole was left where the earth was. But the hole has not moved. Likewise Darkness does not move.

@Solace:

Your physicist friend was clearly not much of a physicist, you don't even need to bring Relativity into it, it's an elementary problem.
DonQuigleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 20:03   Link #16773
Bri
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
Of course the question is...just how much faster than light is their particle? 60 nanoseconds over how much distance verse say the distance verse a light year in a year's time?
Not much faster, rougly a few thousand meters per second extra. The distance they ran the experiment over was 730 km. The time difference was 60ns. With distance and speed of light given you can calculate the travel time of light, subtract the time difference and you have the travel time of the particle. Devide the distance by the particle travel time and you have the speed of the particle.
Bri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 20:25   Link #16774
Solace
(ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
@Solace:

Your physicist friend was clearly not much of a physicist, you don't even need to bring Relativity into it, it's an elementary problem.
At least you understand why I was screwing with him. Apologies if anyone thought my answers in this thread were totally serious.
__________________
Solace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 21:48   Link #16775
Marcus H.
Hunk o' Burning Love
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: the Philippines
CERN discovers FTL particles... a satellite crashing onto Earth... what's next, a young scientific researcher found dead somewhere?
__________________
Marcus' Handpicked!
Summer 2014: Hanayamata, Rail Wars!, Rokujouma no Shinryakusha!?, Sabagebu!, Gekkan Shoujo Nozaki-kun and Hanamonogatari.
Autumn 2014: Log Horizon S2, Amagi Brilliant Park and Fate/Stay Night (2014).


Contact me on Wikia, MyAnimeList and Hummingbird.
MyAnimeList Status|| Watching: 40!! Completed: 210. Plan to watch: 33.

Marcus H. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 21:56   Link #16776
ChainLegacy
廉頗
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Massachusetts, US
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
That's a completely different matter. "Dark Matter" (which does indeed make up most of the universe) is not "Darkness". The name is simply referring to the fact that we can not see it, it is not emitting light -> Dark matter. Dark matter is not existing in some lightless portion of the universe, it exists pretty much everywhere, we simply can't see it, because it's "dark". It emits nothing, and no other light reflects off it.

But as I said, Dark matter is not "Darkness". Darkness doesn't exist. It's just like a Hole can't be said to exist. They are both just a lack of something.

If you had a hole in the ground, and the wall collapsed, filling it up, but leaving another hole next to it, would you say the hole has moved? No, the earth moved, and a new hole was left where the earth was. But the hole has not moved. Likewise Darkness does not move.
At no point did I mistake dark matter for darkness so you need not elaborate on that any further.

Is there a physical boundary to the universe? And beyond it, is nothingness darkness? I suppose it's more philosophical at that point.
ChainLegacy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 22:19   Link #16777
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChainLegacy View Post
At no point did I mistake dark matter for darkness so you need not elaborate on that any further.

Is there a physical boundary to the universe? And beyond it, is nothingness darkness? I suppose it's more philosophical at that point.
There's likely not a 3 dimensional boundary.... head off in a straight line and at *some point* you're probably going to return to where you started (though billions of years may have passed and it'd be unrecognizable). There's like a 4+ (10, 11, +?) dimensional space that is bounded that we exist in.

This is easier to view from the perspective of an ant on a globe. the globe appears flat to him, but if he travels far enough he notices he's back where he started. If he develops binoculars, he notices the 'horizon effect' and begins to put together enough clues that he lives on a sphere in some larger space. That's roughly what we're doing in a 3-d perceivable universe. There are behaviors and clues we're collecting that imply a higher dimensional reality both at the quantum and the cosmological levels.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 22:35   Link #16778
ganbaru
books-eater youkai
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
Solar startups plough ahead despite Solyndra
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...78I63C20110919
Quote:
Solyndra's collapse has cast a harsh spotlight on rival start-ups backing a promising solar technology that, despite the flameout by a leading player, remains on the verge of cracking the renewable energy market.
__________________

ganbaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 22:41   Link #16779
Tri-ring
The Censor Bat
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Land of the rising sun
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
There's likely not a 3 dimensional boundary.... head off in a straight line and at *some point* you're probably going to return to where you started (though billions of years may have passed and it'd be unrecognizable). There's like a 4+ (10, 11, +?) dimensional space that is bounded that we exist in.

This is easier to view from the perspective of an ant on a globe. the globe appears flat to him, but if he travels far enough he notices he's back where he started. If he develops binoculars, he notices the 'horizon effect' and begins to put together enough clues that he lives on a sphere in some larger space. That's roughly what we're doing in a 3-d perceivable universe. There are behaviors and clues we're collecting that imply a higher dimensional reality both at the quantum and the cosmological levels.
Although I am leaned towards the closed universe concept, modern observation of space suggests that the universe is not closed in a 3 dimensional space sense. This observation still cannot dismiss the possibility in a higher dimension.
__________________
Tri-ring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-23, 22:43   Link #16780
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganbaru View Post
Solar startups plough ahead despite Solyndra
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...78I63C20110919
You know.... if the startup of the automobile industry had been reported in this style we'd still be on foot. Solyndra was *one* company that failed (mostly due to poor management) that got seed money from the government like many other companies in many industries. The flame-waving on Solyndra is purely orchestration by the ultra-right to both smear the current administration and to trip up and smear "green tech" in general (*cough* oil/gas *cough*). Tell them to stop taking all their subsidies, loopholes, and such (while declaring bankruptcy to sidestep problems) and then we'll talk
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
current affairs, discussion, international, news

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:19.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.